Options
New Fake....1934 Peace....Anacs/Coinworld....
AUandAG
Posts: 24,539 ✭✭✭✭✭
Registry: CC lowballs (boblindstrom), bobinvegas1989@yahoo.com
0
AUandAG
Posts: 24,539 ✭✭✭✭✭
AUandAG
Posts: 24,539 ✭✭✭✭✭
AUandAG
Posts: 24,539 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
follow-up article linked from the bottom of the anacs article
edit to add: example in a pcgs holder sold via HA
i'm only providing links, no inferrances intended
.
the transfer dies had these problems and tells?
Now I'm confused, is it a fake or not.
bob
<< <i>So, what does NGC say? That the coins were made decades ago? That the coin used to make
the transfer dies had these problems and tells?
Now I'm confused, is it a fake or not.
bob
lol. this is not the only instance the TPG go separate ways on certain coins. just adds a little more to a world full of uncertainty
.
you all may have already known, but i just figured it out. if you click the image with the arrows in the CW article, you can see close-ups of the areas in question. yay.
.
Many members on this forum that now it cannot fit in my signature. Please ask for entire list.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars
I am reminded that some very high quality counterfeit 1934 quarters appeared almost 30 years ago, along with 1917 quarters. Perhaps the same counterfeiter made these 1934 dollars, and nobody noticed them until now?
TD
<< <i>I am reminded that some very high quality counterfeit 1934 quarters appeared almost 30 years ago, along with 1917 quarters. TD >>
i wonder if you speak of the rolls or quarters that were distributed amongst a bourse floor?
<< <i>“Some numismatists feel that when a mold is taken from the genuine coin, that mold eventually becomes the die,” Fahey said. “The idea is that a type of resin or ceramic is used to make the mold, and is then hardened to die strength.
“Others think that a second transfer process is used, where all the details of the genuine coin are transferred from the mold to a metal die.
“The important part of the process, from [ANACS’s] viewpoint, is that when you use a genuine coin to make fake dies, all of the marks and defects on the coin end up as repeating depressions on the resulting fakes. When a counterfeiter tries to correct these problems on a fake die, they end up leaving tool marks that are often even easier for us to pick up.
“As long as they avoid polishing their dies the same way the U.S. Mint does, and as long as they do not have access to the presses and other striking technology used at the Mint, they will always leave diagnostics on their fakes. Getting the luster right still seems to be a major problem with counterfeiters,” Fahey said. >>
<< <i>This is the first I have heard of this piece.
I am reminded that some very high quality counterfeit 1934 quarters appeared almost 30 years ago, along with 1917 quarters. Perhaps the same counterfeiter made these 1934 dollars, and nobody noticed them until now?
TD >>
Do we know where those were made?
<< <i>
<< <i>This is the first I have heard of this piece.
I am reminded that some very high quality counterfeit 1934 quarters appeared almost 30 years ago, along with 1917 quarters. Perhaps the same counterfeiter made these 1934 dollars, and nobody noticed them until now?
TD >>
Do we know where those were made? >>
I never heard that their source was determined.
Tooling Marks?
I guess I shouldn't bother submitting this Eisenhower then since the "tooling marks" are obvious!
Or how about this one found by Brian Vaile?
Bottom line, tooling marks are a part of the die making process whther its the US Mint or an unauthorized independent. Post production die work was done all the time. remember the re-engraved tail feathers on the 1952 Washington Proofs? What about the re-engraved Motto on the 1938 Jefferson Nickels?
There will come a point where new discoveries "could" be pushed into the "possible counterfeit" category if folks aren't careful.
The name is LEE!
it seems there are many that have read the article but haven't viewed the set of images provided.
there are some things on the coins in question that are referred to as, "not possible" for authentic usa coinage.
case in point, how does a gouge get inside a bag mark from the edge of another dollar?
this is not the only questionable mark on the coins in question
<< <i>.
it seems there are many that have read the article but haven't viewed the set of images provided.
there are some things on the coins in question that are referred to as, "not possible" for authentic usa coinage.
case in point, how does a gouge get inside a bag mark from the edge of another dollar?
this is not the only questionable mark on the coins in question
I had not seen this image before.
There is a very simple, and quite possible, explanation for that so-called gouge inside the reeding mark.
Imagine that the coin that hit this one had previously suffered a bag mark of its own, that cut across the reeding that later hit the illustrated coin. The depressed area in the reeding would leave the raised area in the reed mark, just like the depressed area in a die caused by a die gouge leaves a raised area on a coin.
TD
Class?
Bueller?
anyone? anyone know? anyone...
.
<< <i>In order for a bag mark to be considered a "repeating bag mark," it must be seen exactly the same in the same spot on two or more coins. Has this mark been seen on more than one coin? >>
the article(s) I read did comment about similar markings on more than 1 coin, but i don't recall if it was just the die "scratches" and/or the bag mark with apparent gouge inside
.
ttt
.
added all the pups from my folder of images i found for this
<< <i>
anyone come across one of these?
.